Tag Archives: economy

SCOAMF in Infographic Form

By Duane Lester - - 2 Comments

This is not how leaders lead. This is a great example of a SCoaMF in action:

From the Speaker’s blog:

After President Obama addressed a Joint Session of Congress, Republican leaders issued a memo outlining possible areas of common ground, including extension of 100 percent bonus depreciation, small business capital formation, and payroll tax relief.

The president, however, demanded an “all or nothing” vote and vowed to take his plan to “every corner of the country.” The reception has been chilly. Economists and fiscal watchdogs have balked at the plan. An estimated 750,000 small businesses are threatened by the proposed tax hikes, and the Arizona Republic talked with small business owners who are “wary” and “skeptical” about the president’s latest proposal, fearing it could be little more than “another stimulus plan.” Fox News reported that “a majority of Americans don’t believe” his “plan will help lower the unemployment rate…” And the president has been greeted by tough front pages in city after city.

When the president demanded Congress “pass this bill” now, Democratic leaders in the Senate blocked a vote on it (just minutes before he railed against Republicans for standing in the way).

I don’t think it was ever meant to pass. I think it’s a tool for the President to use against Republicans in order to paint them in speech after speech as being against putting people back to work. You can see this in his continued lambasting of them, despite the fact they aren’t blocking anything, but have in fact offered to work with him on the bill.

Obama didn’t expect it to be Democrats who stood in his way, which can be attributed to his narcissism and to the fact he’s a SCoaMF.

Respond to this: 2 Comments

America Continues Decline, Falls to 5th Place in Global Competitiveness

By Duane Lester - - 0 Comments

America was the top of the list when President Obama took office. Today, we dropped down to fifth:

The announcement by the World Economic Forum was the latest bad news for the Obama administration, which has been struggling to boost the sinking U.S. economy and lower an unemployment rate of more than 9 percent.

Switzerland held onto the top spot for the third consecutive year in the annual ranking by the Geneva-based forum, which is best known for its exclusive meeting of luminaries in Davos, Switzerland, each January.

Singapore moved up to second place, bumping Sweden down to third. Finland moved up to fourth place, from seventh last year. The U.S. was in fourth place last year, after falling from No. 1 in 2008.

The rankings, which the forum has issued for more than three decades, are based on economic data and a survey of 15,000 business executives.

Tomorrow, Obama will suggest a plan of more spending and school renovation to help pull America out of this slump.

No, really. That’s pretty much his plan.

For some reason, I don’t see us climbing up this list anytime soon. At least, not under this “leadership.”

What about you?

Respond to this: Comment

AIM: Israel Targeted Again by New York Times

By Accuracy in Media - - 0 Comments

AIM on Facebook | Twitter

From Accuracy in Media‘s Betsi Fores & Anna Corley

The New York Times article, “U.N. Charts High Jobless Rate in Gaza, Despite Israel’s Easing of Blockade” (emphasis added), discusses a recent UN report on the condition of the Gazan economy.

Referring to the economic blockade of Gaza, which was done by both Israel and Egypt, the article states that “The policy of weakening Hamas seems to have failed, but the policy has been highly successful at punishing the people of Gaza.” The article cites the Palestinian Authority as the largest source of income to Gazans, paying 65,000 of them to not work but instead to protest the fact that Hamas ousted Fatah from power in Gaza in 2007; and Hamas as the second largest source of jobs but also as the fastest growing source. The Times should stop casually citing Hamas as though it was the Walmart of the Gaza Strip. Hamas is a terrorist organization.

President Obama acknowledged as much in his speech at the State Department on May 19th, also known as Cairo II. In that speech Obama said, “How can one negotiate with a party that has shown itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist?” He was referring to Hamas’ refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist, and Israel’s refusal to negotiate with them as part of the Palestinian government. But just a couple of weeks later, he was reportedly pressing Israel to do so anyway. The Washington Times reported on June 12th that “The White House is pressing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to publicly adopt President Obama’s view that Israel’s pre-1967 borders should be the basis for future peace talks.

Respond to this: Comment

AIM: White House Response to AIM “Green Jobs” Coverage Misunderstands “Market Forces”

By Accuracy in Media - - 0 Comments

AIM on Facebook | Twitter

From Accuracy in Media‘s Michael Watson:

In a tweet sent by White House media official Jesse Lee in direct response to AIM’s coverage of the Politico report on the elusive “green jobs” the President has promised, the press office sent “a few folks who disagree.”

The first item was an image of President Obama at a photo-op with workers at a solar energy plant. The second item is more interesting. Lee tweeted an article written for CNBC by “freelance journalist” Rob Reuteman which claimed that “everyone seems to agree there will be many more [green jobs] in the coming decades.” Reuteman claims that “market forces” in addition to regulatory mandates are creating such jobs.

Reuteman notes that “twenty-nine states have ordered their utilities to produce up to 30 percent of power through renewable energy in the next couple decades.” This is a mandate, not a market force.

Reuteman reports that the stimulus program “earmarked more than $70 billion in direct spending, tax breaks, and loan guarantees…most of it for ‘green energy.’” This too is not a market force but state intervention.

Reuteman then finds his first “market force,” noting that a for-profit university in Colorado offers a degree in “Wind Energy Technology.” This is the same “Wind Energy Technology” that Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) noted receives “25 times as much [in subsidy] per megawatt-hour as…all other forms of electricity combined.”

Citing a report by IHS Global Insight for the United States Conference of Mayors, Reuteman claims that “4.2 million green jobs over the next 30 years” will be created.  This translates to 140,000 jobs per year, or approximately the minimum number of jobs that must be created in one month to keep the unemployment rate from rising. It is worth noting that the Global Insight report was published in October 2008, before the effects of the September 2008 financial calamity were widely known. Additionally, the study assumes that legislatures will not only continue to enact “Renewable Portfolio Standards” which mandate that “renewables” will constitute a certain proportion of total electricity generation but also raise the mandated targets. Reutman has not found his “market forces.”

Reuteman also reports that the stimulus provided significant amounts of money to community colleges to train students in “green job” skills. This again is clearly a “legislative mandate” and a state intervention.

In conclusion, Reuteman can only claim vindication on half his thesis. If legislative mandates continue to subsidize “green” technologies, jobs will be created in those sectors. However, his claim that the private market will switch to the technologies Reuteman prefers is unsupported: The only “incentives” he can demonstrate are state and federal subsidies, not customer preference. Reuteman and Lee may be noble in their desire for a world in which windmills are plentiful and migratory bird deaths are legion, but they must be honest about the costs of their dream.

Respond to this: Comment

AIM: Still Looking for “Green Jobs”

By Accuracy in Media - - 1 Comment

AIM on Facebook | Twitter

From Accuracy in Media‘s Michael Watson:

While researchers at King Juan Carlos University in Spain found in 2009 that the Spanish “green jobs” program killed over two jobs for every one it created, Politico notes that “the White House can’t point to much solid evidence” that green jobs are being created. Politico states that “Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers suggests 225,000 clean energy jobs were either created or preserved,” but does not acknowledge the follow-on effects identified by the Spanish study.

Politico, which deserves some credit for its open skepticism of Obama administration claims, reports that “White House officials say asking about the connection between the 9.1 percent unemployment rate and the administration’s green jobs campaign is the wrong question.” Instead of looking at macroeconomic effects of policy, Politico notes that the officials would rather show off the “exponential growth” in highly subsidized “clean technology industries.”

The Politico quotes “top Republican” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) as “not seeing [green jobs].” Murkowski said, “I don’t know” when speculating on whether it was premature to judge.

Politico notes that “Obama pledged…5 million green collar workers” and that “he’s spent considerable time since entering the White House trying to make that happen.” Politico reports that “Democrats say…incentives have petered out” and that “they’re not all that optimistic about new funding opportunities.” Perhaps given the Spanish experience, Americans should be optimistic that Democrats aren’t optimistic about the future of the program. By the way, one Republican who the Politico did not consult goes further than the two it does—Sens. Murkowski (R-AK) and John McCain, (R-AZ)—in pointing out the dangers of the Green Jobs program.

“A major example of this dilemma occurred in Newton, Iowa, where President Obama visited on Earth Day to tout green jobs at a new wind turbine plant,” Sens. James Inhofe (R-OK), and Kit Bond (R-MO), reported on April 27, 2009. “During the visit, the President noted that new green jobs replaced manufacturing jobs where a Maytag plant closed.”

“However, he did not mention that only 700 jobs paying $13 per hour replaced the 1,800 jobs paying $20 an hour plus health care.” Sens. Inhofe and Bond both serve on the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

Respond to this: 1 Comment

Summer of Recover Rampage Continues Unchecked: Umemployment Rises to 9.6%

By Duane Lester - - 0 Comments



The leviathan that is the Summer of Recovery continues it’s rampage against the American economy, creating a swath of destruction similar to a Jenny Craig support group’s effect on an Old Country Buffet. This time, it’s caused the unemployment rate to rise to 9.6%:

Job losses continued to mount in the U.S. economy last month, though at a more modest pace than expected, putting further pressure on policy makers to take action to spur growth and employment.

Ok, let’s stop right there. Someone is going to have to talk to the official spokesmen of the Obama Summer of Recovery Communication Department, aka the main stream media, and tell them to stop using the term “unexpectedly.” Everything bad that happens in this economy is somehow not expected.

Not expected by who? I know I expected these things to happen. Pretty much everyone who opposes the Keynesian economic policies of this administration expected this.

After 18 months of fail, I think it’s time to stop being surprised with more bad news.

Nonfarm payrolls fell by 54,000 last month, matching the level of revised losses recorded the previous month, the U.S. Labor Department said Friday. The revision in July layoffs to 54,000 followed an original estimate of a 131,000 drop in payrolls.

The U.S. economy has shed jobs for three straight months, though the losses in August were about half the 110,000 predicted by economists in a Dow Jones Newswires survey.

The unemployment rate, calculated using a separate household survey, edged up to 9.6%, as expected, after holding at 9.5% for previous two months.

The Stimulus Plan was promised to keep unemployment under 8%. Without it, it was suggested the unemployment rate may jump as high as 8.5% in 2009 and peak at 9% in 2010.

And now Christina Romer is channeling Joe Biden as she leaves the White House, saying they didn’t really understand what was going on:

An estimate of what the economy will look like if a policy is adopted contains two components: a forecast of what would happen in the absence of the policy, and an estimate of the effect of the policy… we, like virtually every other forecaster, failed to anticipate how violent the recession would be in the absence of policy, and the degree to which the usual relationship between GDP and unemployment would break down.

So what is the anticipated response from the rabid socialists in the halls of Congress and the White House?

More spending.

Brilliant.

Respond to this: Comment

Congress Reaches Agreement on How to Further Screw Up the Economy, Our Lives

By Duane Lester - - 6 Comments

This won’t end well:

After months of uncertainty about how the U.S. would craft new rules, the agreement offers the clearest picture since the financial crisis of how markets and the government will interact for decades to come. The common thread: large financial companies are facing a tougher leash.

Oh, Duane, come on. How can you know this won’t end well?

Two quotes from Sen. Chris Dodd.

First:

“This is about as important as it gets, because it deals with every single aspect of our lives,” said Sen. Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), a chief architect of the compromise.

Yeah, Chris Dodd is the “chief architect” of a bill that will “deal with every single aspect of our lives.”

Consider that while reading the second quote from the same guy:

“No one will know until this is actually in place how it works.”

It impacts every single aspect of our lives in ways we don’t even understand.

Thank you, fickle voters, for electing these titans of jackassery.

Respond to this: 6 Comments

Global Warming Fear Mongers Give Us Four Months, Then Game Over

By Duane Lester - - 4 Comments

It’s time to start thinking moonbase, folks. If we, as in the whole world population, don’t come together and make a deal in Copenhagen in four months, we have sealed the fate of the entire Earth. So says Ban Ki-Moon, the United Nations Secretary General. And you know he doesn’t have any ulterior motives:

Climate change, as all previous speakers have already stated, is the fundamental threat to humankind.

It exacerbates all of the problems we face: poverty, disease, hunger and insecurity. It impedes progress toward the Millennium Development Goals. It deepens the food and energy crises.

That is the harsh reality.

But there is an upside: if we combat climate change with a sustainable, low-emissions approach, just like we see around us in Songdo, we can change the way countries develop.

We can foster a green economy and green growth.

We can fight hunger and poverty while protecting the environment.

The downside is equally dramatic.

If we fail to act, climate change will intensify droughts, floods and other natural disasters.

Water shortages will affect hundreds of millions of people. Malnutrition will engulf large parts of the developing world. Tensions will worsen. Social unrest – even violence – could follow.

The damage to national economies will be enormous. The human suffering will be incalculable.

We have the power to change course. But we must do it now.

As we move toward Copenhagen in December, we must “Seal a Deal” on climate change that secures our common future. I’m glad that the Chairman of the forum and many other speakers have used my campaign slogan “Seal the Deal” in Copenhagen. I won’t charge them loyalty. Please use this “Seal the Deal” as widely as possible, as much as you can. We must seal the deal in Copenhagen for the future of humanity.

We have just four months. Four months to secure the future of our planet.

How long did Bruce Willis have to train those misfits in “Armageddon?” If Harry Stamper can get those guys ready, surely NASA can get a moonbase team ready and start building within the next four months. After all, that’s about as likely as a deal in Copenhagen changing the climate on a global scare.

That wasn’t the only ridiculous statement made in the speech. This one caught my eye as well:

The world is looking to Korea for leadership.

Wha…? Who? Who is looking to Korea for leadership?

I know sailors who are looking to Korea for cheap leather. But who is looking to them for leadership? Is America looking to them? The United Kingdom? China? Russia? France?

Respond to this: 4 Comments